July 29
It's near the end of July and I'm still waiting for the summer heat, since after all we're in a global warming crisis. I think Al Gore and his ilk are staying indoors so as not to be seen and jeered. But if it isn't global warming, it's the swine flu or the falling dollar, or worse, the American president behaving in opposition to his own words when rushing through his health-care baby:
"A heretofore 'unknown' 2004 interview with Barack Obama by leftwing radio host Randi Rhodes has just emerged. And basically, as you shall hear [Obama opposes the very thing he's doing today]He criticized Bush's rushing of a budget because it was a stack of papers "a foot high and nobody has any idea what's in them and nobody has read them...And it gets rushed through without any clear deliberation or debate...people felt very intimidated by the [Bush] administration." The thing that Obama is known most for in his first six months of making legislation is rushing legislation. Why should we believe anything he says?
World Net Daily won't let go of the birth-certificate issue. It had a piece wherein a high-up (Jon Klein) in CNN demanded of Lou Dobbs not to fire up the story any longer (he was asking Obama to just produce the original) because word was that the people in Hawaii who had charge of birth certificates had destroyed the paper originals when they went electronic/computerized. World Net Daily immediately came out with a statement from those people telling that they did not, and would not, destroy any original paper certificates. In other words, Lou Dobb's boss was lying to him to get him to cease discussing the certificate story, and Lou Dobbs doesn't like to be lied to. WND then came out with some potential damaging information which might end up exposing that the Obama people created a false certificate:
"Images of two 1961 Hawaii birth certificates similar to the one President Obama purportedly has on file have now been unveiled.The Honolulu Advertiser published photostats of the original long-form birth certificates of twin daughters born...one day after Obama was supposedly born at the same facility.
The Nordykes' certificates include information missing from the short-form document for Obama published online, including the name of the hospital, the name of the attending physician, name and address of the parents, the race of the parents and the race of the baby."
Imagine that, leaving out all of that information. Is that not very damaging? Why were the parents not shown? The story gets worse, though word is that Obama was born in the U.S.:
Dr. Chiyome Fukino declared she has seen the 'original birth records' that verify Obama was born in Hawaii and is a 'natural-born American citizen,' the Honolulu Advertiser reported....A close examination of the birth certificates issued by Kapi'olani to the Nordyke twins shows the registration number precedes the number given Obama, even though the future president was born a day earlier.
Susan Nordyke was born at 2:12 p.m. Hawaii time and was given No. 151 - 61 - 10637, which was filed with the Hawaii registrar Aug. 11, 1961.
Gretchen Nordyke followed at 2:17 p.m. and was given No. 151 - 61 - 10638, which was also filed with the Hawaii registrar Aug. 11, 1961.
According to a version of Obama's purported short-form certificate available from FactCheck.org, Obama was given a higher registration number than the Nordyke twins. The online image indicates the number is No. 151 - 1961 - 10641, even though he was born Aug. 4, 1961, the day before the twins, and his birth was registered with the Hawaii registrar three days earlier, Aug. 8, 1961."
You can be sure that WND is looking into the possible reasons for the two discrepancies. One of them is that the Obama certificate uses "1961" whereas the real certificates use only "61." It doesn't take Colombo to figure out that Obama's certificate may have been fraudulently created. If this is true, what does it say to the world about the American president? Someone who's willing to commit fraud and then go on accepting honor and even rock-star status from the American people.
I think he was born in the U.S., and that he's eligible to be the president, for if he were not, while the birth certificate people know it, then they themselves could reap legal trouble for not telling appropriate authorities that MUST reveal the facts. I therefore think that Obama and his inner circle are hiding his true father (Frank Davis). I think it's very important for the globetrotters that the Arabs believe his father to be a Muslim.
A certificate fraud would only be the tip of the iceberg, for he continually claims that he's working for the American people when hoping to pass tough legislation, when in fact he's working for globalists. The end of his life will be very bitter unless he makes a U-turn in the way he conducts himself.
In Iraq, Barzani has exposed that Joe Biden was involved in the decision, by the Kurd leadership, to put off the Kurd referendum that promises to create much trouble:
"Mr. Barzani said one reason he agreed to put off a referendum on the regional Constitution that was to have been held during [July 25's] elections was a request this month from Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and other American officials.'They asked if it was possible to postpone it because the timing was inappropriate,' he said.
Mr. Barzani said he was determined to put the constitution to a referendum this fall. Such a move would place him on a collision course not only with the central government, which opposes the document in its current form, but also with a new Kurdish political coalition that did surprisingly well [in the election]"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/29/world/middleeast/29kurds.html
We see that the U.S. has clout with the Kurds. We see that the globetrotters do not want the Kurd Constitution in its present form. But the fact that the Change Party also opposes the Constitution serves as evidence (not conclusive but not terrible either) that its leadership is a U.S. or globalist plant.
We now find Robert Gates in Iraq attempting to move Kurd-versus-Arab events the way in which the O-Team wants them moved. It's of course being painted as "help" and "mediation," but I'm looking for string pulling and ulterior motives:
"U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned squabbling Kurds and Iraqi Arabs on Wednesday that they don't have much time to settle their differences...Gates talked with Kurdish President Massoud Barzani and other leaders...
on their home ground in the Kurds' oil-rich, self-ruled area. ...[Pentagon spokesman Geoff] Morrell said the U.S. military has advisers already serving as go-betweens for the Kurdish militia and Iraq's armed forces.
Gates told Barzani that the U.S. backs a set of United Nations recommendations to resolve some of the major disputes. Morrell would not characterize Barzani's response, except to say that Gates left the meeting 'with the sense, just as he did in Baghdad, that the Kurds very much want to take advantage of our presence.'
...Gen. Ray Odierno, the top U.S. general in the country, identified the tension in northern Iraq as the 'No. 1 driver of instability.'
'Many insurgent groups are trying to exploit the tensions,' Odierno told reporters [yesterday]. 'We're watching very carefully to see that this doesn't escalate.'"
The claim made by the Americans is perfectly understandable, that they don't want to lose, though a ripping civil war, all that American blood and money has produced in Iraq. However, the claim that Insurgents are hoping to find opportunity in the growing threat is one that might apply to the Americans. Conceivably, Obama could be using the threat to justify his deeper involvement in Iraqi affairs...involvement that has nothing to do with the Kurd-Arab disagreements.
It's perfectly understandable that, in return for the blood and money spent, the Americans want to be repaid in some way. Ironically, the Democrats who criticized the blood and money spent are now in a position to reap the rewards. BUT, will God allow them to acquire a net-profit, or will He give them some gravel in their teeth to chew over...since it was never His will that Babylon be established.
The other irony is that some Christian Republicans are in favor of seeing an established Iraq because they had supported the Bush war with passion. It's not only an irony, it's opposition to God's will. When one reads Isaiah 13 and 14, the foreground fact is that God despises end-time Babylon, and Personally brings it to ruin. My suggestion to such Christians, some of whom have stopped reading these updates (because I don't take their pro-Bush position), is to leave the past error behind without guilt, and simply take on an attitude toward Iraq that is made clear in the above prophecy. Simply admit that it's wrong for Americans to be building Iraq.
Today we find a pertinent first-ever:
"For the first time, Russia and Iran will hold a joint naval maneuver in the Caspian Sea, The Iranian Mehr News Agency reported [today].According to the report, the maneuver will include 30 Russian and Iranian ships, as well as helicopters.
A senior official in the Iranian ports authority was quoted by the report as saying that the maneuver would increase the coordination between the two countries, and focus on search and rescue operations and the prevention of pollution."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1248277919369&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
It is politically-correct that Obama not view it as a love-affair. It is politically-correct that Obama view it as what Russia claims it to be, an anti-pollution drive. For those who are not given to political-correctness, it looks like a case of Russia threatening closer military ties with Iran where Obama pushes the Georgia button. The short story below exposes the fact that Russia simply doesn't trust Obama's military on Russia's border region:
"July 29 (Interfax) - The Russian side is not troubled by U.S. plans to replace the Manas air base in Kyrgyzstan with a cargo transit center for the international forces in Afghanistan, a Kremlin source told Interfax [today].'If the declared mandate of the future center fully coincides with its name, we have no reason to worry. We hope the facility will not assume any other form,' the source said.
I'm assuming that the source's worry is Obama's attempt to make NATO-like inroads into that part of Russia's border region (Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, etc). It's not my imagination only that suspects it to be the case. When a military base exists in a country, it can offer the country "help" as a smokescreen for determining the country's politics. Russia is simply sending Obama the message today that Russia is watching his military intrusions, and doesn't like it.
I suppose that, sooner or later, Russia's alliance with Iran has to go public. Since I don't expect the globetrotters to cease in their world conquest -- a financio-political conquest that includes Russia -- we should expect more of what we see today, a Russia-Iran love affair.
To solve the problem, "The Obama administration said [yesterday] it is not ruling out the possibility of Russian membership in NATO." A little laughter coming out of me, I can't help it:
"Assistant Secretary of State Philip Gordon told U.S. lawmakers that the United States would consider Russian membership in the military alliance that was founded to protect Europe from Soviet aggression.Gordon said NATO's doors should be open to democracies in Europe. He added that 'if Russia meets the criteria and can contribute to common security, and there is a consensus in the alliance, it shouldn't be excluded.'
NATO is often vilified in Russia, which has objected to the alliance's expansion to include countries on its border.
But the Obama administration is seeking better relations and says it wants to convince Moscow that NATO is no longer a threat.
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=us-says-russia-could-join-nato-2009-07-29
Make of it what you will. It's too bizarre for me. Obama is committed to his flower-power years, and its love-ins. What happened to that movement? Why did it go cold? Did the people discover they didn't love each other when they got close to each other? Why not? Because sinners are not lovely. One might handle sin when high on dope, but when "straight," no one like to see warts, let alone dance on them. Who but God knows, most of all, that people can't love one another when they sin? Sin is taking what is not yours; it ruins love. Globalists won't be happy until they take the entire world.
We saw Obama get ruffled with Syria some weeks ago. He declared that Syria was no friend so long as it continued to support the Iranian axis. Yet, true to his sinful nature, Obama is seeking to form a love-in with Syria again. Let it go, fool. Go back home and leave the world alone. It doesn't belong to you. God can handle things quite well without your outstretched hands. Don't offer a hand of partnership to sinners:
"The Obama administration is trying a new gesture in its effort to engage with Syria, telling the country's leaders it will lean toward granting their requests to import non-sensitive American equipment normally banned by U.S. law."http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=us-makes-new-gesture-to-syria-2009-07-29
This information was not supposed to be leaked.
Uh-oh:
"Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued an order [today] for the purchase of swine flu vaccines, as the Health Ministry warned that more than 700,000 Israelis were expected to contract the virus."
July 30Is the following article a conspiracy theory, or is it the looming reality that the nations don't want the workers to know:
"A chilling report circulating in the Kremlin [on July 18] states that President Medvedev and Chinese President Hu have issued an 'urgent warning' to the United States that says if the Americans allow an Israeli nuclear attack upon Iran, 'World War will be our response'.Fueling Russian and Chinese fears are intelligence reports stating that Israel has moved over three-quarters of its Naval Forces through the Suez Canal and has assembled over 30 of its US-built fighter jets in Kurdistan for a planned attack using American made 'bunker busting' bombs and nuclear armed cruise missiles.
Russian Military Analysts state in these reports that...upon a combined Iranian and Lebanese Hezbollah 'response' that is said will 'rain missiles down upon Israel', Israeli submarines and surface vessels [will] unleash nuclear armed cruise missiles against Iran's military, religious and political infrastructure.
Before continuing, ask if it's realistic to expect Israel to use nuclear bombs to get at Iran's underground facilities. Assuming it does, will Russia and China hold good to the promise above, to start a world war? Did Russia and China truly make that warning in the first place? I have not heard of it anywhere else, and it's been nearly two weeks since this article came out.
Assuming that Russia and China have issued such a warning, I read it as a scare tactic to keep Israel out of Iran, and yet we could expect some military reaction, especially from Russia, in support of Iran. If the Kurd controversy alone doesn't bring Gog to Iraq, this could. Note the claim, that Israel has jets in Kurdistan.
Another point to make is that Moscow could be deliberately exaggerating the Israeli strike to utmost proportions as an excuse for its military involvement in the Middle East should the strike occur. There is evidence that Israel is working on it; the article continues where I left off:
"...as reported the Haaretz News Service:
'Israel's recent deployment of warships across the Red Sea should be seen as serious preparation for an attack on Iran, an Israeli defense official told the Times of London on [July 16]."This is preparation that should be taken seriously. Israel is investing time in preparing itself for the complexity of an attack on Iran. These maneuvers are a message to Iran that Israel will follow up on its threats," the official was quoted as saying.'
I missed that Haaretz article. I came across a few articles on Israeli ships/submarines in the Suez, but nothing written in stone as is the above. If the strike does occur with participation from Israeli vessels passing through the Suez, Egypt will be labeled an accomplice by the Iran axis, creating a perfect setting for the fulfillment of Daniel 11's king of the south prophecy. In such a scenario, Gog once again looks like a Russian agent in cahoots with Iran.
The article adds a scenario -- an Israeli alliance with the Kurds -- that I've not yet included in my picture of Gog's entry into Iraq:
"Fueling Russian and Chinese fears over Israel' planned attack on Iran, these reports continue, is the Jewish state's planned use of Iraqi territory from their Kurdistan region which borders Iran, and which this past week furthered its goal to become an independent Nation with the adopting of a new constitution, and with its Israeli trained army can expect an 'immediate' invasion from both its sworn enemies Turkey and Iran. Even worse, Syria's leader has reportedly warned the US that upon Turkey and Iran declaring war upon Kurdistan and Israel it would 'no choice' but to honor its defense agreements with the Iranians calling for their Nations to protect each other in times of peril."Having an Israeli connection to the Kurds adds one heavy-duty piece to prophetic expectations, and may not only explain why Gog enters northern Iraq in the first place, but why he then invades both Egypt and Israel. Whether or not Turkey and Syria enter the war on behalf of Iran is debatable, but I'm expecting Gog at any time; I feel he's overdue.
Gog must be anticipating Israel's strike and should therefore have a response laid out already. Kurdish oil is one grand incentive for Gog to enter Iraq on behalf of Iran. Since Russia is publicizing a love affair with Iran at the moment, it would feel justified in entering the issue center-stage in crisis-mode. Whether that means a military or non-military entry has yet to be seen. Here's how the article views the pre-planned Russian response:
"Most ominously in these reports though, both Russia and China state that they will have 'no choice' but to place an 'immediate embargo' against any oil and gas coming from the Middle East and weapons to the region the United States may try to supply."There you go: Russia badly wants an excuse to enter northern Iraq so that it can control the oil and the New-Iraq politics while in crisis-mode. A few months ago, when it appeared that Israel's strike on Iran was imminent, Medvedev announced that Russia would become involved in the Middle East to protect its security. The article claims a conspiracy involving the U.S.:
...Not being known to the American people is that while their Military Forces have been fighting in Iraq, the United States and Iran have longstanding agreements allowing the Iranians to shell Iraqi Kurd territory without fear of reprisal, an agreement that also includes Turkey who have battled against the Iraqi Kurds for decades.If this is true, it exposes the sheer sin of the American military, and globetrotter opposition to the Kurds. A likely reason for this opposition is that the New Iraq is willing to re-pay the American-led coalition with a good deal on its oil, but Kurds want such a large slice of oil revenues that it doesn't leave much or anything for rewarding the coalition. This scenario would be another example of hypocrisy, since Democrats criticized Bush harshly for seeking to lay paws on Iraqi oil.
The article claims to have quite a bit of Russian Intelligence that I haven't seen elsewhere: "Russian Intelligence Analysts further report that the long-serving head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, Gholam Reza Aghazadeh, resigned today over fears for his and his family's safety upon an attack by Israel upon the Persian Nation." That makes sense. It would be expected that many employees just up and quit rather than take the risks. Perhaps Israel has stalled to allow the employees time for finding new jobs. Israel can't tell them the day before that the strike is on.
As Christians, should we hallow an Israeli strike on Iran's facilities wherein many are killed in the process?
I'll be watching for others who have similar Intelligence, but for now I have no further comment other than to say, don't stray from these updates for too long. Or, if Israel invades Iran, watch for Gog in northern Iraq.
Fifteen minutes is all, but it happened:
"U.S. President Barack Obama met with former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on [July 21] during his visit to Moscow, the head of the Gorbachev Foundation press service said."http://www.gorby.ru/en/rubrs.asp?art_id=26846&rubr_id=305&page=1
There's no way to know the purpose of the short meeting from this article. It may suggest that Obama is wanting to remain in cahoots with Gorbachev's club, or that Obama wants to give Putin the impression that the U.S. wants to defuse a large percentage of its nuclear arsenal.
If you're interested: "Israel is up in arms over a declaration by a British government spokesman that the UK is funding political activity in Israel." This again exposes the intrusiveness of the globetrotters. They are a rotten bunch, make no mistake about it. The intrusions admitted to here must be a mere tip of the iceberg. Intrusion is their game. Infiltration as double agents, spies, liars, deceivers, never ceasing to turn events to their advantage. Driven by hatred of all that is good, and my money-lust. Let us not be deceived; they are not out to secure a perfect Utopia for the people...whom they view as their slaves.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1248277926821&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFullWhat is the British government doing seeking a Palestinian state in the Jerusalem region? Is this not the height of intrusion? Obama is doing all he can not to be viewed as intrusive, yet the British-government agent in the article was telling Arabs openly that it's funding anti-Israeli movements inside Israel. Clearly, Britain now wants to spear-head the Palestinian-state movement, perhaps because Obama seems soft and slow suddenly with his poll numbers down. What this Western attitude does is give Gog the ticket to invade Israel with the Palestinian issue as his excuse.
If you're wondering why Britain would betray Israel in this way, it's got to be due to the vision that globetrotters have: a world of peace (conducive for making money as opposed to a world in crisis) based on eradicating Muslims concerns in Israel. The globalists think that giving Palestinians their own state will eventually subdue the hard feelings that Arabs keep against Zionism. Obama does the same thing when he offers Arab terrorist groups a piece of pie (at America's expense) in return for this sought-after peace.
Once the globalists get the Arab situation worked out, they can concentrate on setting up a global government...and all that it entails for controlling our every movement, and even our thoughts if possible. The only good thing is that the world peace they seek isn't going to happen, thank God. I hate to put it in this way, but thank God for the Arabs, if you know what I mean. Thank god for one evil people who will frustrate another evil people using the evil that Christians are not permitted to use. I'll take it, because I don't want to be ruled by sick and demented globalists who never have enough.
Let God establish Israel, at which time the Arabs will be non-starters. Zionism can't set Israel up because Zionists are corrupt. What is this we see, evangelicals supporting Zionism? These are the same Christians who know their prophecy enough to know that God comes in the end to virtually destroy Israel, and yet they support the Zionists who make Israel worthy of Punishment in the first place. Is this like decorating the tombs of the murdered prophets and then being charged by God for partaking in their murders?
There's a headline: With poll numbers plummeting, returns to bashing Bush." It's a sad testament to what sort of man leads the nation at this time. His supporters are saying that the strategy is acceptable. What? It's acceptable to bash another person merely to get one's poll numbers up? Isn't that what ignorant kids do, or adults without class, without maturity, without scruples...who have yet to grow up or understand right from wrong? God forbid that we should become like these people.
Before I close, a thought occurred to me. Since Biden openly gave Israel a green light this month to make a strike against Iran, I've got to wonder whether this is evidence that Obama and Gog are together seeking to control Iraq. In other words, Biden was egging Israel on toward a strike so that Gog can step into northern Iraq with the claim of quelling the situation. In fact, Israel may be in Kurdistan by a U.S. plot just for this reason of setting up an excuse for the Obama-Gog alliance to control northern Iraq. Just a thought.
Or, Israel is not in Kurdistan at all, but it's a false report from those who want to use it as an excuse to enter northern Iraq.
I'm going to need to shorten the updates as much as I can because I'm going blind. A year ago, I could read letters clearly one foot away. Now, even though I stand back two or three feet, I see double, a blur. I don't think it's the screen brightness because I have it on low light. It could be an online pulse of bad radiation. Whatever, I've got to see if less time spent online heals my vision. Have a good Godly day.
July 31
Every indication is that the globetrotters are not finished in Iraq:
"Delegations led by the Turkish Interior Minister Besir Atalay, Iraqi Minister of State for National Security Shirwan al-Waili and U.S. Major-General Steven A. Hummer, the deputy chief of staff for operations in Iraq's multinational force met in Ankara for trilateral talks to discuss how to address the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), which uses northern Iraqi territory as a base to organize attacks inside Turkey......'Our aim is to remove the terrorist organization from Iraqi soil and border areas," al-Waili told a joint press conference with Atalay (Today's Zaman, July 29)....
...These developments indicate that the AKP government is cooperating with Turkey's allies including the U.S., E.U. and Iraq in order to address the long-standing Kurdish question..."
Although the plan includes non-military strategies, I mention this because it involves Obama and the EU. I'm open to an anti-Christ that is not a Russia/Putin agent, but rather an Obama agent. I'm even open to a Turkish Gog. If Gog is to be an Arab, I would chose a Turk above all because he would stand chance at being lifted to European rule, especially as Obama seeks to have the EU grant membership to Turkey by 2014. Immediate upon Obama's taking Office, there had been a love-in between he and Turkey.
I also mention the above story because it claims that the Turkey-West program wishes to enter northern Iraq to deal with the Kurd problem. How the program will try to "remove the terrorist organization from Iraqi soil" has yet to be seen, but one would think that Iraqi permission would be required, in which case we could have pro-Obama and pro-EU Turkish agents entering northern Iraq on a political level that could evolve to a military level...as the Sunni of Mosul are engaged to assist in the program.
Thus far, this picture is realistic and even expected. It's also realistic from the present standpoint to foresee Iraq complaining about the Sunni participation, at which time the Turk-West alliance may spurn Iraq and, as Gog-prophecy fulfilled, we could see an over-throw attempt of Maliki...with Iran in support of the over-throw, in-part because Iran may also be called upon to join Turkey's anti-PKK program.
Keep in mind that Turkey is fundamental to the Nabucco pipeline receiving Kirkuk oil so that the EU and it's O-helper could tend to justify a rebellion against Iraq gladly, especially if Iraq does not deal adequately with the coming Constitution of the Kurdish government. Kurds do NOT like the EU, and would view the big-O similarly where he's involved in Kurdish affairs with the EU. All in all, it looks like the EU is about to enter northern-Iraq politics in a substantial way.
On the flip side of the coin i.e. envisioning a Russian Gog:
"From June 29 to July 6, the Russian military staged massive Kavkaz 2009 exercises involving air force, army and naval units. During Kavkaz-2009, forces were deployed on Georgia's borders and in the breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia...Unprecedented in Russian military tradition, its top military commander, the Chief of the General Staff and First Deputy Defense Minister General of the Army Nikolai Makarov was directly in command of Kavkaz 2009......Kavkaz 2009 was held under a tight cloak of secrecy and the reports of their successful outcome remain vague. No foreign observers were invited. There are no official explanations as to what made Kavkaz-2009 so special that it justified putting Makarov in command, with Medvedev and Serdyukov participating.
Last week a report in the Moscow Gazeta daily quoted a source in the General Staff as saying that the main objective of Kavkaz 2009 was to test a new computerized command and control system...
...Speaking at a meeting of the National Security Council in Tbilisi on July 9, Saakashvili announced: 'Russia planned another war against Georgia, but fortunately due to the support of our strategic partners and the entire democratic world they were not allowed to do so' (The Georgian Times, July 14). U.S. pressure could indeed have played a role, but the reported underperformance of the Akatsia and Sozvezdie systems during Kavkaz 2009 could have been another serious restricting factor.
...The overall situation remains very tense. There is no letup in Russian officials making threatening statements, accusing Georgia of rearming with Western help, and of preparing 'provocations' and planning treacherous new armed attacks against Abkhazia and South Ossetia (ITAR-TASS, July 23; RIA Novosti, July 29). It is unclear, whether any possible military action against Georgia will be postponed until the Akatsia and Sozvezdie systems effectively go online in the future, or if improvised shortcuts will be swiftly employed before the good weather season ends this year in the fall."
While a re-invasion of Georgia doesn't place Russia in Iraq for any particular reason, Russia is clearly wanting into Middle-Eastern affairs:
"The presidents of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia and Tajikistan met in the Tajik capital Dushanbe [yesterday] for an unusual security summit amid growing concerns about Islamic militancy....Russia, meanwhile, is keen to sharpen its profile in Afghanistan and Pakistan, two countries where it has had only a limited role to play..."
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/afp/20090731/twl-russia-afghanistan-pakistan-tajikist-575b600.html
This is stepping on Obama's toes, isn't it? Until now, Russia has made it appear that it wants nothing to do with the Afghan theater. I wonder what they have in mind there. Couldn't the Russians al,so step on Obama's toes in Iraq, especially if some schism occurs between Maliki and Obama. Maliki has already rebuked the Obama administration for it's secretive talks with Iraqi-Sunni terrorist. Since those talks occurred in Turkey, it makes sense that the Sunni were being asked to participate in Turkey's anti-PKK program.
Meanwhile, there appears to have been a shift in the relationship between Obama and Netanyahu:
"Residents of Pisgat Ze'ev reacted with dismay and anger [yesterday] over a report that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu had frozen the construction of 900 apartments in the east Jerusalem neighborhood after continued American pressure.The report, which was broadcast on Channel 10 late Wednesday evening, said that Netanyahu had agreed to the freeze after talks with US Middle East envoy George Mitchell on Wednesday."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1248277936917&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
That would explain why the American team in Israel this past week has been happy to be soft on Netanyahu, i.e. since they knew they had a deal with Netanyahu wherein he betrayed his right-wingers (who oppose settlement freezes).
Pisgat Ze'ev is located about three miles north of Old Jerusalem, to the immediate north of where the old location of Nob is thought to be. In Isaiah 10, I see the anti-Christ making his headquarters at Nob when he becomes poised to trample Jerusalem for 42 months. Pisgat Ze'ev is an Israeli part of town surrounded by Arab neighborhoods.
Perhaps the reason that Netanyahu caved in (though some are not accepting that he has, or will, cave in) to Obama has to do with the following story:
"The weeklong US-Israel marathon in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv ending Thursday, July 30 was the platform for the Obama administration's first unveiling of a new US diplomatic-military program for Iran and its nuclear threat, DEBKAfile's military and intelligence sources disclose. The three-staged program was presented by US defense secretary Robert Gates and national security adviser James Jones...The new approach consists of three steps for thwarting Iran's drive for a nuclear bomb:
...3. If Iran continues to forge ahead with its nuclear and missile development, the US will resort to its military options. DEBKAfile's military sources report that the American visitors shared with Israeli leaders their specific plans of actions with details of the resources they planned to wield.Gates and Jones wound up their presentation by stating unambiguously: Iran is a big power issue and it behooves the United States as the leading world power to handle it. So leave it to us and act like an American ally and friendly government. The role they assigned Israel was to leave its military option on the table in order to keep Tehran under pressure.
I can see where such an offer could have Netanyahu promising a settlement freeze in return. There is little doubt that this week's U.S. drive in Israel had the purpose of squelching the latter's desire to strike Iran...due to the dire scenario that could develop worldwide. But will Netanyahu sit in the false hope that America will attack Iran eventually? If he has agreed to a settlement freeze, he'd want the O-people to keep a lid on it, though they should leak it out because the shrinking-O needs to boast about a success in these days of under-50 poll numbers.
Have a great weekend.
NEXT IRAQ UPDATE
Updates Index
The 2016 prediction for Armageddon
(from my human intellect and therefore subject to retraction)
is explained here.
If you've come to this book beginning at this webpage,
see the rest of the Gog-Iraq story in PART 2, accessed from the